• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

A group of eight University of California students filed a class-action lawsuit against the UC Board of Regents on July 24, claiming the UC breached contracts made with students when raising student fees.

The plaintiffs allege that the university failed to give sufficient notice of fee increases that affected students enrolled for spring and summer terms.

If the court certifies the suit as a class-action lawsuit, the eight named plaintiffs will represent other UC students who qualify as unnamed plaintiffs. If successful, students would be refunded fees paid for semesters during which the plaintiffs say untimely fee increases were made.

The plaintiffs will also seek a preliminary injunction, which would prevent the university from charging graduate students enrolled before December 2002 for increased fees until the case is settled.

Attorney Jonathan Weissglass, who is arguing on the students’ behalf, said the university broke a contract to graduate students when it raised professional school fees, after promising those fees would not be increased for the duration of a student’s enrollment.

In an effort to mitigate the effect of funding cuts to the university, the regents voted in mid-July to raise graduate school fees, along with other UC fees, by 25 percent starting this fall.

“What we’re saying is breach of contract ... it’s like buying anything – after a price is agreed on, the store can’t hike up the price,” Weissglass said.

Jeff Blair, university counsel for the regents, said the documents cited in the claim – “catalogues and other publications” – do not constitute a binding contract that would preclude the regents from raising fees.

“I don’t believe the fundamental principal on which their suing is based on is meritorious,” he said.

John Alden, the only UCLA student who is a plaintiff in the case, said he is suing the university for spring and professional school fee increases because he was “shocked” at the university’s approach to raising fees.

“Like any lawsuit for a breach of contract, it’s important for professional responsibility to keep the regents accountable,” said Alden, a law student.

The complaint filed by the plaintiffs cites a timeline that indicates some students registered for spring semester courses and paid spring semester fees before the end of December 2002. The complaint states that students were not individually notified of a fee increase for which they were billed in January 2003.

In addition, students who registered for summer courses were not informed of increased fees until “the last second,” Weissglass said.

The complaint states that “students had no prior warning that the fees at which they had registered for summer courses were subject to change after registration,” and they “reasonably relied upon” the stated fees to plan their finances.

Blair said California’s constitution gives the regents authority to raise fees at their discretion, adding that he has “defended successfully similar types of challenges.”

In February 2003, students in Maryland filed a similar suit against the University of Maryland, alleging that mid-year fee increases constituted an illegal breach of student contracts. The court ruled in favor of the university in April, stating that documents plaintiffs cited in the case, which included registration materials and bills, did not qualify as contracts.

Mo Kashmiri, a UC Berkeley law student who is a plaintiff in the case, said filing suit against the regents was a last resort for the students, who had e-mailed their complaints to the UC Office of the President, only to be rebuffed.

Kashmiri added that the cost of attending Berkeley law school, which was lower than that of other schools he considered, factored into his decision to enroll there.

“I don’t know if I’m going to be in school next semester. Most likely, I’m going to take the semester off, work and come back. ... Students and families need notice to plan finances before they go to school,” he said.